[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sipu Rout vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party(S) on 20 April, 2026
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.1091 of 2026
Sipu Rout .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Biraja Prasanna Das, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party(s)
Smt. Sarita Moharana, ASC
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
02. 20.04.2026
1.
This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In filing the present CRLMC, the Petitioner claiming
himself to be the registered owner of the vehicle in
question bearing registration No.OD-02-9342 which is
seized based on the allegation of its involvement in
unlawful activities, has challenged the impugned order
dated 12.01.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Khurda at Bhubaneswar in Crl. Revision No.129/2025
arising out of the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the
learned JMFC-V (Cog. Taking), Bhubaneswar in CMC
No.1230 of 2025.
Apart from the above, the Petitioner has also sought for
a direction from this Court to the authority concerned
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 21-Apr-2026 18:58:01
is seized in connection with 2(a)CC No.284 of 2025
arising out of P.R No.154/2025-26.
3. Heard.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
above noted vehicle has been seized based on the
allegation of recovery of 520 liters of ID liquor from the
said vehicle, which was being transported without the
knowledge of the Petitioner. He further contends that
since the above noted vehicle has been parked at an
open space, the condition of the said vehicle is going to
be deteriorated due to direct exposure to the sun and
rain. He, accordingly, prays for a direction from this
Court for releasing of the said vehicle. He also relies on
a decision of this Court in the case of Ratnakar Behera
Vrs. State of Odisha 1 wherein it has been decided that
"mere initiation of confiscation proceeding cannot act as
a bar for delivery of the vehicle to its owner when the
owner of the registered vehicle has not been found
guilty".
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the State, on
instruction, submits that based on the allegation of
unauthorized transportation of Id liquor the above
noted vehicle has been seized on completion of all the
formalities meant for the said purpose. He further
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa 1
Date: 21-Apr-2026 18:58:01 Order dated 05.08.2020 passed in
contends that on registration of the F.I.R necessary
proceeding pertaining to the said vehicle has already
been initiated. He, in the process, submits that releasing
the said seized vehicle at this stage may hamper the
process of completion of the said proceeding.
6. Be that as it may, since the condition of the above noted
seized vehicle is getting deteriorated day-by-day due to
direct exposure to the sun and rain, this Court directs
the learned court in seisin over the matter to release the
above noted seized vehicle in the zima of the Petitioner
subject to the conditions that the Petitioner:-
(i) shall deposit cash security of Rs.3,00,000/-
(Rupees three lakh only) before the
concerned Registrar, Civil Courts within a
month hence;
(ii) shall file an undertaking that he will not
change the appearance and colour of the
seized vehicle;
(iii) shall not allow the said vehicle to be used
for any illegal purpose; and
(iv) shall produce the said vehicle before the
court or before the authority concerned as
and when required.
7. In case of violation of any of the above conditions by
the Petitioner, this order would not be applicable.
8. This CRLMC is, accordingly, disposed of.
Designation: Personal Assistant
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 21-Apr-2026 18:58:01
Judge
Ayaskanta
